AKHIL GUJARAT GENERAL MAZDOOR SANGH Vs. PIOMA INDUSTRIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule Mr. J.D. Ajmera, Learned Additional Central Government standing Counsel, waive service of notice of Rule for the respondent No. 1. Mr. D.G. Chauhan, Learned Advocate, waives service of notice of rule for respondent No. 2.

(2.) By way of this Special Civil Application the petitioners seek direction to quash the order dated 7-7-1993 passed by the Central Government under Sec. 19-A of the Employees' Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (Hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1952), whereby the matter was remitted to the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Ahmedabad with the direction to initiate proceedings under Sec. 7-A of the Act, 1952 and to determine whether the petitioners' establishment is in continuation of Imperial Soda Factory and Pioma Industries or a new establishment. The petitioner has also been given liberty to file their representation under Sec. 19-A of the Act, of 1962 if they are not satisfied with the order of the respondent No. 2.

(3.) The facts of the case in short are that Azeez Pirojsha Khambhata, the owner and proprietor of the Trade Mark Rasna established a factory at Ahmedabad in the year 1917. It was known as an Imperial Soda Factory and Pioma Industries. The said establishment was manufacturing food flavours and soft drink concentrates powder and liquid which products were used in preparation of soft drinks candies, jellies, bakeries, Pharmaceuticals etc. The said establishment was informed under the letter dated 24-5-1979, that the provisions of the Act of 1952 were applicable to them with effect from 1978, under the Schedule head, "Aerated water..." They were also allotted Fude Code No. GJ/2916. They were also directed to report compliance with effect from 1-3-1978. The employer establishment disputed applicability mainly ' on the ground that they were not manufacturing "Aerated water" or soft drinks and as such they are not covered under the Schedule. It was stated that their products are food, flavour and soft drink concentrates that the same could not be directly consumed as "Aerated water." Thus, the inquiry was commenced under Sec. 7-A of the Act of 1952.